Report for HCR 55 DV Working Group
Introduction
This report presents an analysis of TRO violations (HRS 586-4), Order for Protection violations (HRS 586-11), and harassment by stalking charges (HRS 711-1106.4 and HRS 711-1106.5). The analysis focus on statewide data, disaggregated by circuit [under construction!], over a reporting period between January 1st, 2017 and December 31st, 2025. The following sections contain tables and graphs to explore different aspects of the data.
Section 1: Cases filed
Out of 6,581 cases filed statewide for TRO violations, OFP violations, or harassment by stalking during the reporting period, 28.7% had more than one charge.
Multiple TRO charges: 10.7%
Multiple OFP charges: 15.9%
Multiple harassment by stalking charges: 0.2%
Combination of TRO violations, OFP violations, and harassment by stalking charges: 1.9%
Because 1.9% cases had a combination of two different charges, they are double counted in the case count statistics below.
No cases in this data set had multiple defendants, so the number of cases equals the number of defendants. However, some defendants had multiple cases. An analysis of defendants with multiple cases is provided in section 5.
Section 2: Charges filed
The data below represents the data at the charge level, To be consistent with case filing data, the year reflects the year the case was initially filed, not when the charge was filed.
At the charge level, cases can have more than one charge both within and across offense categories. The number of charges is necessarily larger than the number of case filings because of this.
Section 3: Charge Dispositions
WARNING: Disposition estimates are highly unreliable due to inconsistent, inaccurate, and incomplete data entry. These figures may conflict with past and future reports and should be interpreted with significant. The severity of data quality issues makes these statistics unsuitable as a basis for decision-making.
The data below represents the dispositions, if any, on the charges in cases filed during the reporting period. To be consistent with case filing data, the year reflects the year the case was initially filed, not when the charge was disposed.
To view only one charge code section or one disposition category, use the search box. For example, typing “586-11” will show only rows for violation of orders for protection.
Section 4: Rule 48 Dismissals
Next, charges that resulted specifically in a Rule 48 dismissal are estimated. These charges dispositions are a subset of the discharged/dismissed category in section 3. WARNING: Rule 48 data is highly unreliable due to inconsistent data entry.
Section 5: Repeat offenders
Last, we look at repeat offenses. The analysis below folds 586-4, 586-11, and harassment by stalking together. So a repeat offender could be someone who offends under 586-4 and offends again under 586-4, but it also includes people who reoffend under a different offense.
Because the same defendant can be listed under multiple person IDs, it is likely that the numbers below underestimate the frequency of reoffending during the reporting period.
The way to read the first row of the first table below is that there is one individual who has 22 cases during the reporting period. The sixth row indicates there are four individuals with 10 cases. The first row of the third table shows there are two people, each with eight cases in which at least one of the charges resulted in a conviction.